Still ghost capping. - Page 2

psijaka · 2013-05-23, 06:36 AM

Anyone else notice the faction imbalance in the lattice?

I counted the links from each warpgate to the nearest Tech/Amp/Biolab and overall the NC have the least, the TR the most.

Nearest Tech plant:
NC - 4 links
VS - 4 links
TR - 5 links

Nearest Biolab:
NC - 3 links
VS - 6 links
TR - 6 links

Nearest Amp Station:
NC - 5 links
VS - 4 links
TR - 4 links

So combined links to the nearest of all 3 types:
NC - 3+4+5 = 12 links
VS - 4+6+4 = 14 links
TR - 5+6+4 = 15 links

Not sure what effect this will have in practice.

Artimus · 2013-05-23, 06:44 AM

For those that feel the Lattice System is taking away from the game I feel you on that, becuase in a way it is. In the long run though it will be much better. When "Ghost Capping" in PS1 it usually involved traveling to a different continent, dropping gens, and put in a hack. Not so much to take the base, but to pull the enemy off the front lines. Over time when more continents are introduced and the META Game is actually implemented I can almost garuntee you will see squads starting to do this.

Sory bad grammer typing on fork truck at work X)

Kerrec · 2013-05-23, 06:47 AM

Originally Posted by Assist

Too many links, too many bases. Zergs still avoiding each other. At least from the 1.5 hrs I've played so far. Hopefully it changes, but I think there's still too many options open for players. VS defeated the TR at Hvar, TR left the entire north west, we're now capping all of north west indar. Nothing changed from the Hex system :|
Sad, but true.

You must have left too early. The VS went all the way north to Saurva, then tried to go East to Camp Connery. They were stopped at Camp Connery when the TR shifted from the East of the map to deal with the VS. TR pushed back to Saurva and down past Mao. Then a solid front line formed along those 2 lanes that lasted several hours.

When I started playing, population on Indar was 33/33/34. The NC were pushing north on the East side, VS were pushing north on the west side. TR had to choose what side to defend. Simple as that.

Also, when I logged off at midnight EST, VS had 36% continent pop, NC had 36% continent pop and TR had 28%. I didn't look to see if there were any significant battles between NC and VS, but IF the TR are forced to fight on 2 fronts, then it makes sense that you didn't see enough resistance.

Snipefrag · 2013-05-23, 07:46 AM

I totally disagree.. From the 3 hours i spent playing on Waterson there was very little ghost capping, it was the old familiar to and fro'ing from the original. Was great to see, good job to the devs.

Assist · 2013-05-23, 08:43 AM

Originally Posted by Snipefrag

I totally disagree.. From the 3 hours i spent playing on Waterson there was very little ghost capping, it was the old familiar to and fro'ing from the original. Was great to see, good job to the devs.

Fair enough and this did happen later on. I had some great fights last night around the Dahaka area, just not any good ones around the Saurva area. I may have come across wrong, I do like the lattice changes as I think they're certainly a step in the right direction. I just think they needed to take it farther. I feel like there's still too many options open to avoid fighting.
For example, relocating your defenses and backing up one base to re-defend doesn't seem to happen at all. From what I could tell, once a faction is engaged in a large fight and lose, they simply go elsewhere until they again realize they're losing too much ground. For the attackers that means they win one fight and gain 4+ bases, but have to sit there essentially ghost capping 4+ bases for the next 30 minutes.

Maybe I'm asking too much from the developers and it should indeed be put on the shoulders of the players to make the decisions of where and why to defend, but I really wish they'd give more incentive for attacking/defending individual bases. There's not a good reason to try to defend Quartz Ridge with your 30 players if you just lost the north Hvar outpost to 70 players. It's more efficient and effective for you to take those 30 players to another location and grab a base that favors your odds. That's something that I would like to see change.

Narrack · 2013-05-23, 10:19 AM

On woodsman Indar i didn't see any ghost capping last night and nobody was giving an inch of ground without a massive fight with huge tank battles between bases. There was a massive back on forth between us and the VS (who i love to fight cause unlike the TR they aren't cowards) in the south i just hope the VS continue to win the alerts so more 4th factioners join them from the NC cause there's too many of us and not enough of them

Figment · 2013-05-23, 11:01 AM

Hey Kerrec, have you considered playing some PS1 now that you've got access to it? We've had our disagreements, but it would be the perfect moment to see for yourself what the fuss was about and why I said it's hard to understand if you haven't played it first.

Would be glad to discuss things and show methods in game if you'd be on at the same time. You'd have a much more informed opinion to debate with (even if you don't like it).

Kerrec · 2013-05-23, 11:04 AM

Think that request would have been more appropriate in a private message than in this thread.

But I'm not a subscriber. I do buy stuff with Station Cash, but I don't have a membership. I thought that excluded me from the PS1 offer.

CraazyCanuck · 2013-05-23, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by Assist

Maybe I'm asking too much from the developers and it should indeed be put on the shoulders of the players to make the decisions of where and why to defend, but I really wish they'd give more incentive for attacking/defending individual bases. There's not a good reason to try to defend Quartz Ridge with your 30 players if you just lost the north Hvar outpost to 70 players. It's more efficient and effective for you to take those 30 players to another location and grab a base that favors your odds. That's something that I would like to see change.

I think its the mindset of many players which is just an after effect of the older hex system and as you say not enough incentive. Given time, I think there will be a change in how people play. The hex and its reward system made it simple just to go to where the best xp returns were with very little weight being put on what and where a particular base was beyond xp and whether or not you'd loose your mbts.

The devs need to change the way they award xp for both defense and offense. It only makes sense as the static xp rewards is garbage and was chosen for the path of least resistance.

Numbers of the armies involved, duration participated in an attack/defense, the duration of the defense/offense itself, and the connectivity of a particular base in relation to the areas around it and who holds it should all be taken into consideration for how the xp is awarded. If I am going to spend 3 hours at one base defending, I would like that taken into account. If the defenders are outnumbered 3 to 1 and manage to hold the defense, whether completely or for whatever time frame it took for the enemy to win it, I would like that taken into account. The same criteria could be used for offense.

If a base is taken quickly because there are no defenders, the the xp return shouldnt be the same as a base you fought tooth and nail for, for hours against an equally numbered defense.

Give the players more of a reason to fight for every inch of ground and reward them accordingly for the time and effort invested. Do this and the intensity of every battle will improve.

psijaka · 2013-05-23, 07:01 PM

Originally Posted by Assist

Maybe I'm asking too much from the developers and it should indeed be put on the shoulders of the players to make the decisions of where and why to defend, but I really wish they'd give more incentive for attacking/defending individual bases. There's not a good reason to try to defend Quartz Ridge with your 30 players if you just lost the north Hvar outpost to 70 players. It's more efficient and effective for you to take those 30 players to another location and grab a base that favors your odds. That's something that I would like to see change.

You've got a point there but I think that the foundations of a good lattice have been laid. The developers can't actually stop people running away from a fight no matter what they do, all they can do is try to direct the flow and offer a sensible incentive.

Just been involved in about an hour's excellent action in and around Regent's Rock on Ceres; the battle swung back and forth quite a few times, and at one point I thought that we had lost it (A, B and C taken and only 2 minutes to go), but reinforcements arrived; an epic fight back. I do think that the lattice is working.

OCNSethy · 2013-05-23, 10:39 PM

Originally Posted by psijaka

Anyone else notice the faction imbalance in the lattice?

I counted the links from each warpgate to the nearest Tech/Amp/Biolab and overall the NC have the least, the TR the most.

Nearest Tech plant:
NC - 4 links
VS - 4 links
TR - 5 links

Nearest Biolab:
NC - 3 links
VS - 6 links
TR - 6 links

Nearest Amp Station:
NC - 5 links
VS - 4 links
TR - 4 links

So combined links to the nearest of all 3 types:
NC - 3+4+5 = 12 links
VS - 4+6+4 = 14 links
TR - 5+6+4 = 15 links

Not sure what effect this will have in practice.

Dont forget, they rotate the warpgates, so it should all even out in the wash.... hopefully

Falcon_br · 2013-05-24, 03:02 AM

Originally Posted by OCNSethy

Dont forget, they rotate the warpgates, so it should all even out in the wash.... hopefully

That's what I don't get, they allways put on the patch notes that the warp gates will be rotate, but they only rotate then on the gu fix!
We are only two weeks with the north warp gate of Indar, I am really not ready to leave it, I even got a giraffe camo to use on those lands!
So we stay with the southeast warp gate for almost 5 weeks, but we just stay with the north for 2 weeks?
I think it is time for a schedule rotation, rotating with the GU is not fair enough!
We really didn't camped the frikking southeast warp gate with anti air on those cannons, even now that we got strikers and anchored buster max, I just hope the other factions respect that and don't do it with us, the excuse the VS use, we are doing that to you because the NC did to us is really retarded, do that to the NC now, you guys can really do that, just don't do it with the TR because we really hate trolling tactics that give no benefit to your faction!

Baneblade · 2013-05-24, 05:52 AM

Removing ghost capping entirely wasn't really the point. Redirecting ghost capping from being the normal default strategic option was the point. It worked.

Now the problem is there still isn't enough incentive to defend.

Jonny · 2013-05-24, 07:00 AM

For people arguing for and against the new lattice system, I'll say my experience.

On Woodman, Indar i've had some of the best fights of my whole time playing this game since beta.

Even though we (VS) were pushed back near the warpgate I feel like the lattice has most importantly:

Given purpose and direction. Instead of running into afew random squads or meeting zergs at the usual chokepoints, there are plenty of my team mates and the enemy clashing over bases. Massive fights are happening alot more often and the fight flows instead of splitting or randomly dispersing as people don't know where to go next. Now everyone moves down the line and smaller bases have proper fights over them! Great!

As more continents are added I think the issue of too many players clashing (so peoples PC's can't handle it) will be resolved, and i'm really looking forward to inter continental warfare, warp-gates that transport armies between continents etc.

I don't 100% get the lattice yet...like what happens if a base gets cut off from its link to the warpgate, but I'm thinking of ideas based on the node system of UT2004 Onslaught and how the layout of those connections changed the tactics/flow of a map.

I think the lattice layout will and probably should undergo tweaking - they could even have smaller bases that aren't connected but are captured like the old hex system based on influence. Will post more on this soon!

Figment · 2013-05-24, 07:07 AM

Originally Posted by Kerrec

Think that request would have been more appropriate in a private message than in this thread.

Ah sorry. You're right, didn't think about that. Apologies.

But I'm not a subscriber. I do buy stuff with Station Cash, but I don't have a membership. I thought that excluded me from the PS1 offer.

Nope.

Everyone who played PS2 gets access.